Book Review: The Revelations by Alex Preston

The Revelations by Alex Preston.

This is the story of four friends fresh out of university who become involved with an evangelical cult-like Christian religious movement.

Marcus, Mouse, Lee and Abby have all attended an unnamed university; a good institution probably collegiate, somewhere old. They have had a good time there but you get the feeling its been a somewhat cosseted experience.

When we meet them they are all struggling with the demands of life, and of London – this sprawling soulless city – and with the fact that they are slowly moving into that part of life where responsibility is burgeoning.

They are out of their comfort zone and so are drawn into religion (or this particular brand of it) to help cope with the pressures of their changing lives. The Course, the movement that has inspired them, pulls them in with its promise of meaning, spirituality and a community. All of the things that vibrant, decadent London seems to lack.

And yet despite their belief and their dedication – they are all Course Leaders – they continue with a parallel life of drinking and sex and partying. I have noticed some reviewers find that odd. I would have thought that contradictory behaviour is the very essence of being human.

Preston captures their struggles and this conflicting behaviour and the resulting angst very well. Each character is well drawn and believable. And the relationships within this foursome are compelling and complex. You get the feeling that this is a writer who is hitting his metre. His first book, This Bleeding City, I enjoyed, but this feels different. More ambition has been set out and achieved.

He treads the difficult fine line between commercial and literary fiction rather well – this is a hard thing to pull off. And the plot rattles long as the four friends move towards The Retreat – a time for reflection and commitment to their religious beliefs. Once there they are faced with the challenge of the commitment being asked of them. They react with varying degrees of calamity.

The other characters are effective too. David, the charismatic Course founder is a complex man. Clearly ambitious and calculating, but you feel he too is caught between that ambition and his own private fears about his veracity and motivation. This is achieved subtly – and this shows the skill of the writing. David is not a Bad Guy, he is nuanced and so an effective device as we can’t sit back and throw fruit at him. Clever.

This is similar to the approach taken to the Church and the Course. Preston does not tell us about how awful the Course is. He just presents it. He lets the plot do its own talking. He shows what they do and how the characters – major and minor – feel about that. He exposes the practices of the church and the inner lives of these fearful, and at times doubting protagonists. Again this takes skill. And he does it very well. There is no authorial whispering in the readers ear. The Church stands or falls on its own merits or otherwise….

It would have been nice if he has teased a bit more of the financial side of the Course out. This is represented by the enigmatic Earl figure. A man who has found another way of making money and we suspect mouths the words and speaks in the tongues as a matter of form to keep this his latest network of contacts and capital open. But I think that’s a personal thing – it’s something I’d like to know about.

Preston seems to be carving a niche for himself as a commentator on London and on the challenges of modern life. I can think of few better goals for the modern writer. Specifically with this novel he has successfully put his finger upon firstly, the religious impetus and secondly, on the mechanisms and techniques – both psychological and more, technical, of a crusading religion.

This is fascinating stuff, with the debate about the place and role of the church in our society we need books like this to shine a light on those charlatans – who are praying on peoples ennui and fear rather than providing a useful place for reflection and growth – what I’d like to think religion ought to be about. (although there are better ways to go about that….)

This is an important book and I would like to see more books with these themes in print.

In summary, Preston captures big themes of belief, faith and doubt in the intimate moments of his well drawn and complex characters. It’s a compelling read, heartrending at times, and thoroughly recommended.

The Revelations is Alex Preston’s second novel. It is published by Faber and Faber.

 

On the public debate on atheism.

There is, it has been said a kind of bland agnosticism in society and that most of us carry round. I think this is probably true. But it’s not an informed choice. Most people are too busy with their day and daily to get to grips with their beliefs about this sort of thing. Religion for most people in this country has absented itself. We don’t concern ourselves with issues of faith, belief and of the role of the Church in Society.

To be honest I think most people are like that about most things most of the time. Not the chattering classes of course. But that’s not most people.

I went to a reading and discussion by Alex Preston and Oliver James. Alex is a novelist and Oliver James is Oliver James. It was very good. It’s always interesting to hear the motivations and the process of how a writer takes an idea and then turns it into a piece of fiction.

The discussion was based around Alex’s book ‘The Revelations’. It’s a fine book about the effects of an evangelical cult-ish religion on four friends fresh out of uni and struggling to varying degrees with life. He captures big themes of belief, faith and doubt very well in the intimate moments these four share. It’s very good. A compelling read and heartrending at times. I think an important book too. I would say that of course as my book shares a lot of the themes. But for me it’s very encouraging that there is – at last – a book in print about these issues.

But the discussion brought up a few things. I think the public debate about Religion and Faith and (the ‘new’) atheism misses a lot. It sets out some things that are wrong – or not refined enough.

For instance, that ‘Religion’ is not a monolith. Alex mentioned this last night. I don’t think any of us have a problem with the old woolly Rowany Williamsy bearded everything’s alright if you pop along to the Fete and the Christmas jumble CofE. Religion for people who don’t really believe – too busy with the school run and just want somewhere nice to get married in. Fair enough, my kind of religion.

But when people attack the new atheists its tends to be because they see that bug-eyed Dawkins man and they imagine him setting himself upon that nice Beardy man with his strident (correct) arguments and they think – that’s not very nice.

But I don’t think Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are that animated by that sort of religion. They are firstly motivated by the kind of religion that they have in America – that which (in a phrase from last night, is ‘punitive and finger pointing’ and invades the bedroom (and so your own free will) and tells you what to do and how to live and sows intolerance in society.

That is a good thing to get angry about.

And that is why the public debate about religion, like so many public debates, needs more nuance. We need to understand fully what people are saying and objecting to. Those people who blithely defend ‘Religion’ need to spend some time in a cult, or near someone who has had the best years of their life taken from them by such a Religion before they get fed up with Dawkins (et al) getting a bit cross. This kind of Religion is wicked and shelters under that misjudged tolerance.

For a great many people religion is not a comfort but a terrible burden. Many people, as Oliver James put it, need a good shrink and not a church to help them with life.

Something else that came up last night was that a great many atheists are atheists because it gives them meaning. Just like a religion does. It ‘places them in a narrative’ as the interviewer put it, rather well. Of course this is true. I call them badge-wearing atheists. They are getting exactly the same thing out of it as religionistas do out of their belief system.

And they are suspect. But that is not to say there are a great many thoughtful (generally more quiet people) who have useful, well founded objections and if you read the books by the New atheists you will see these things rather well articulated.

But Dawkins is not one of those people. He is an atheist because he is a scientist – he sees automatic respect given to something which does not deserve it. Something that directly contradicts things that he fervently believes in. You might say – well isn’t that arrogant of him. And those who hate his approach say – but yes it’s that fervent attitude that we don’t like. But he is so cross because the things he believes in have been forged out of a rigid system – the scientific method. Can you imagine the gall as the bishops come along and say – oh no, that’s wrong. Er, why is it wrong. Why? Oh you want a reason – ah, God said.

I kinda get why he gets cross.

The things that are in opposition are not in parity – if they were I could understand your position. That’s another thing the debate in the press often presents wrongly. Religion v Atheism watch as they go head to head. There’s no parity.

It’s magic and fear versus progress and learning.

People say what about the comfort it provides and the community spirit and meaning. But all of these thinigs can be found outside the church. It’s interesting that the things that people come up with are not of ‘faith’ or religion per se. And it’s also interesting that the best elements of the church (the more acceptable end of the religious spectrum that is) are actually clothes stolen from the enlightenment (Sam Harris).

Believe me there is a version of religion that is insidious and takes away that which is the best of us. And it happens at the personal level and increasingly at the political – and it has to be resisted. Unfortunately that bland agnosticism in society lets it get away with a great deal. We need people like Dawkins to get up, stand up, and cause a bit of a ruckus.

Cool

Cool. An enduring word, and for good reason. It makes sense, it describes rather well what it is. To be cool, you’ve got to be cool. When things get tough – who gets animated and agitated and aggravated? Not the cool kids.

They leave it to others. They watch as the temperatures rises and others lose their, y’know, cool. Sweating, going red, maybe even hyper ventilating – as they watch you and wonder, what’s that like.

Actually no – cool people do not notice the uncool. They just aren’t there. Look, what I am saying here is this: cool people are cool. They are not easily roused. They do not become ruffled. They are….. smooth.

They stare into the middle distance and look as if they are thinking about a really fantastic party they were at recently. 

So how? Well if I knew that, things would be a lot easily. Cooler. But I think I know one important way to avoid it. Don’t tell your kids they are going to fail. No one does this overtly. Well not many. But there is a slice of the population – and I think this is a class thing, that are prone to telling their kids that. And they do this because it’s part of their culture. why?

Well at some point – long time ago – if you did upset the wrong people, if you failed, then you were likely to lose whatever job you had, and starve.

I don’t know. Probably. It’s just a theory.

But there’s definitely a correlation, with class, y’know. Think of the people you know who are cool. Who ask for things in a way that never considers for a moment, that they will be turned down (but still they remain likeable, and that’s the epitome of charm by the way). And that all comes from one place: its manners married to a gentility that is bred out of an environment where they were confident of their own abilities and success. No one tells them ‘you are going to fail.’

Ever.

Now I don’t think this happens so much anymore – it’s very fashionable to tell your kids they will succeed in everything – and there’s plenty wrong with that too. But if you move around in a space where success is expected – it will come. Success begets success. That’s the secret of success, and class and cool.

Probably.